Controlling Challenge in Instructional Simulation

This experiment was designed to assess the effects of instructional control mechanisms that altered the degree of challenge in an instructional simulation. Subjects were taught to place an icon at a position and orientation that corresponded to digital and analogue information displayed on a simulated aviation instrument. Three treatments were compared: a) learner control enabled subjects to control challenge; b) learner control with advisement provided the same control accompanied by ongoing advice on control decisions; and c) computer control automatically adjusted challenge. Treatments differentially affected subjects' response time on immediate and delayed tests and their control decisions during practice. Interference of control decisions with acquisition of the criterion skill and subjects' perceptions of their performance are discussed as potential contributors to the effects of the treatments.

[1]  S. Ross,et al.  Learner control versus program control as adaptive strategies for selection of instructional support on math rules. , 1981 .

[2]  R. Kozma.  Learning with Media , 1991 .

[3]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Current progress and future directions for research in instructional technology , 1989 .

[4]  G. Logan.  Skill and automaticity: Relations, implications, and future directions. , 1985 .

[5]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Effect of adaptive advisement on perception in learner-controlled, computer-based instruction using a rule-learning task , 1983 .

[6]  Christina E. Shalley,et al.  Effects of Goal Difficulty and Expected External Evaluation on Intrinsic Motivation: A Laboratory Study , 1985 .

[7]  E. R. Steinberg.  Cognition and learner control: a literature review, 1977–1988 , 1989 .

[8]  Thomas W. Malone,et al.  Toward a Theory of Intrinsically Motivating Instruction , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Training High-Performance Skills: Fallacies and Guidelines , 1985 .

[10]  C. Shalley,et al.  Effects of Goal Difficulty, Goal-Setting Method, and Expected External Evaluation on Intrinsic Motivation , 1987 .

[11]  Emanuel Donchin,et al.  Adaptive and part-whole training in the acquisition of a complex perceptual-motor skill , 1989 .

[12]  Dee Howard Andrews.  Relationships among Simulators, Training Devices, and Learning: A Behavioral View. , 1988 .

[13]  Thomas H. Gray,et al.  Aircrew Part-Task Training Research and Development in the 1980s: Lessons Learned , 1991 .

[14]  R. Clark.  Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media , 1983 .

[15]  G E BRIGGS,et al.  The relative efficiency of several training methods as a function of transfer task complexity. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  John Seely Brown,et al.  An Investigation of Computer Coaching for Informal Learning Activities. , 1978 .

[17]  Mable B. Kinzie,et al.  Continuing motivation, learner control, and CAI , 1989 .

[18]  Stephen M. Alessi,et al.  Fidelity in the design of instructional simulations , 1988 .

[19]  Esther R. Steinberg,et al.  Organizational/Memory Tools: A Technique for Improving Problem Solving Skills , 1986 .

[20]  R. Tennyson.  Instructional control strategies and content structure as design variables in concept acquisition using computer-based instruction. , 1980 .

[21]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  An Instructional Theory for the Design of Computer-Based Simulations. IDD&E Working Paper No. 23. , 1987 .

[22]  Allen Munro,et al.  Instruction intrusiveness in dynamic simulation training , 1985 .